Equivalent strength is not the same as physical dimensions. An M14 Battle Rifle is not much longer than an M16 even though it has more stopping power.
Not in this case. A Lance takes up the equivalent space of 3WBs, otherwise a Lunar would have S6 Lance Decks. Ships carry weaponry sized to their hardpoints.
You're assuming they didn't agree. We don't really know their exact reasoning.
You're nitpicking, Their end judgement was different from ours - the Defiant has the space for additional weaponry because its LBs are undersized.
Again you are missing the point of the dorsal in the AM equivalent of the Endeavor and Endurance. Those two have to sacrifice their torps in order to get the lance? How then can the Defiant get its torps at the same time getting a dorsal lance?
Because unlike the Endeavour and Endurance, its broadside HBs are undersized - it isn't getting the dorsal lance for nothing, it has already made the sacrifice of half its braodside hardpoints. Neither is it "At the same time getting a dorsal lance" it's getting one lance on dorsal, then swapping one existing lance for S2 torps on the prow.
In addition, the extra point of Lance strength on the prow would take up just as much additional space as a point of lance strength on the dorsal putting it on the prow doesn't magically make it smaller. If half of each broadside isn't sufficient, where does the sacrifice come from to allow this addition?
When in your insistence of equivalents, if we reduce the prow lance to Str 1, it would still be the equivalent of FP3 WBs? Which if I remember my math is still 1 FP more than what the Endeavor and Endurance has. Just because they replaced the broadsides with launch bays does not mean it's not taking up space. Launch Bays means attack craft, ordnance for the attack craft, crews and their equipment, fuel for the attack craft and spares for the attack craft, among other things.
The Defiant itself it proof that a Voss can hold the equivalent of FP6 in its prow - coincidentally exactly 2/3 of a standard cruiser. This makes the other Voss undergunned by FP1, but +/-FP1 is far more cedible than +/- FP4.
And where have I said that the LBs don't take up space? It's just that full size LBs (Including fuel, ordnance and materiel) take up a full FP6 WB hardpoint, and the Defiant's LBs are half size, leaving enough space left over for up to two additional lances. Even accounting for an imperfect reduction in scale, there'll be more than enough space left over to support one single Dorsal Lance.
Anyway, we're arguing in circles, so i propose Plaxor puts it to the vote:
#1. Sigoroth's proposed: S2 lances replaced by FP2 WBs and S2 Torps, for 100pts.
This brings it in line with the other Voss, gives it torps, and just accepts that the Defiant is a pure support ship. Has the advantage of being cheap.#2. Plaxor's proposed: Add S2 torps to the prow, for 130pts.
This is a pure firepower upgrade to bring the Defiant roughly up to the level of its peers.#3. RCgothic's proposed: Functionally identical to Plaxor's, but with one point of lance strength moved into a dorsal hardpoint.
Some feel the Admech Voss Dorsal Lance and sacrifice of half each broadside hardpoint sets precedent for this, whilst others disagree this is sufficient sacrifice. It gets around having Cruiser level firepower on a 2/3 size prow without sacrificing protection. Both AdMech and Zeus LCs have facility to accept a dorsal lance.I would support any of these options, but I have a strong preference for #3.
